Videos show Chicago police fired nearly 100 shots over 41 seconds during fatal traffic stop

Why are undercover cops pulling over a guy for not wearing a seat belt to begin with? Unfortunately, we're still waiting for an answer to that.
- That's an easy answer, they profiled him as a drug dealer and looked for any pretext to stop him. Instead of doing real police work like developing leads and stopping someone because they have probable cause to believe they're transporting drugs. But that's not sexy and adrenaline inducing.
- Isn't failure to wear seatbelt a secondary offense? I believe you cannot be pulled over for it, only cited for it during a legitimate traffic stop.
  
  Depends on the state.
  
  Got pulled over in Utah because my adult passenger wasn't wearing his seatbelt correctly. There was no other pretense for it and there have been ad campaigns making it clear that officers will pull you over for that reason and only that reason.

If a bunch of people in plainclothes rushed my car with guns drawn I'd think I was being robbed.
- This comment doesn't make sense to me. Even if he did think he was being robbed, he's outnumbered four to one, and they already have guns drawn.
  Opening fire isn't a winning strategy even then.
  
  So police can act with the professionalism of criminal organizations, got it
  
  is laying down to let them shoot and rob you the winning strategy?
  
  I said nothing about pulling a gun nor firing. Only what I would think if a bunch of people ran up with guns.

The police must have been very scared!
- Only the bravest cowards join the police force.

The audio isn't all that clear but i heard a returning: "what is going on?" And a lack of an answer followed by excessive firearm usage.
I have a feeling this person, same as the black guy from another video that refused to stop as he was convinced cops came to execute him and decided to pull into a gas station first...kinda knew what was going on by the energy the cops give off.
If you want someone to co-operate you pull them over, explain the situation and there would be no need for firearms. But if you charge someone like wild bulls wanting to make a kill, people are gonna know...it's instinct.
I'e also seen this in a video where a guy got shot in his own house where two cops were yelling opposite commands and killed him for not co-operating, the worst part was when he knew he was fucked because they didn't have their shit together. He was asking for clarity and bang bang bang...definitely cleared it up tho, but that shit ain't right.
Stop murdering people, please.
- Oh no, cops are trained to yell different orders so you can't cooperate.
- It's... Instinct... To shoot at police? I'm sorry but I'd honestly want anyone who's instinct is to shoot at law enforcement to be executed on the spot.
  
  These weren't uniformed police.
  If a bunch of plain clothes people charge at me with guns I'm not going to assume they're police and cooperate.
  
  Call a cop to your house to help your disabled kid? Theyre dead. Call a cop to do anything and some innocent person or dog is going to end up dead. Cops are criminals.
  Makes sense people are going to defend themselves against legal execution gangs.

It is fucking sad and predictable how many people there are in this thread that defend the cops here.
You dont get a prize for being the bestest bootlicker.
- You sure its a prize they want? Maybe they just like the taste? Maybe they enjoy pig dick every day for breakfast.
- The prize is being kicked in the teeth slightly later than everyone else.
- Well you do. You get shot after all the other easy targets. (Still before the insurgents in the hillsl
- You also don't get a prize for calling for the execution of cops, and I'm seeing a lot of it in this thread.

Today's reminder on cop behavior comes from John Oliver - NSFW language:
https://youtu.be/Wf4cea5oObY

“Wear your seatbelt to be safe or we’ll shoot.”
- “He’s putting himself in danger! Open fire!”

You'd think with all the shooting they do cops would be better at shooting things. A hundred rounds for one dude? Even if he was an actual threat that's a huge waste of money. Ammo is expensive.
- Not expensive enough. As the Chris Rock joke goes, maybe if bullets cost $10k per round we wouldn’t have so much needless gun violence.
- Ammo is expensive.
  Legit peanuts compared to what police departments actually spend their budgets on.
  9mm rounds cost ~$0.08 (less if you buy in bulk, which these departments most likely do) That means 100 rounds to kill this guy was about $8.
  They spend more on ammunition for target practice.
  I'm sorry, I know you hate cops but this is just an absurd angle to criticize them over. I know you won't realize this though :(
  You can see what they said when you hit the reply button, even though the comment was deleted.
- He did fire at the police, you know. Pretty sure that counts as an actual threat.
  
  He fired at a group of dudes in civilian clothes driving regular vehicles telling him they were cops. Guess what more than tripled from 2019 to 2021 and continues? Car jackings and armed car jackings.
  They allege this was for a seatbelt. Weapons drawn for a simple traffic stop?
  Plainclothes officers, especially, should not be approaching people with a weapon drawn.
  
  Swirl it a little, slosh it around and swallow it mate. You must like the taste.
  
  Nearly 100 shots. Either they really suck at hitting targets, or they really like shooting people.

Chicago's finest:
In all, the city spent $295 million to resolve lawsuits alleging more than 1,000 Chicago police officers committed a wide range of misconduct — including false arrest and excessive force — in 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022, according to WTTW News’ analysis. Through the end of November, the city spent $62.3 million in 2023 to resolve police misconduct lawsuits.
- The police don't care, those lawsuits come out of taxes.
  
  Yup. The city didn't pay for shit. The citizens of Chicago did. I say make cops pay for lawsuits out of their pension funds. Watch this shit turn around real fast.
- Cost of doing business.

I wish we lived in a world where we could readily believe this statement.
The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side.
Rather than assuming that they probably shot their own officer in their excitement.
- Pretty sure the cameras that they were wearing caught the first shot being fired.
  Also the angle of attack of the shot that hit the officer could point back to where the shot came from.
  
  Still not good enough for our narrative.

Yeah this sounds like an execution.

this is a firing squad

keep doin them guns murica, they solve all the problems
eventually

CBS video here: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmTTSAar7HQSdLDULmg2VQMMwgj3RtWjALVLyLzHG9xJyz
- Thanks for the direct video link! Makes me want to download it for some reason.
- Does it have audio for you?
  
  No, strangely enough.

No mention in the Lemmy summary of this post of who shot first?
- Its never excusable for police to shoot.
  A police life is worth less than anything else.
  
  I do agree they chose to put their lives on the line so should accept the risk before putting other civilians at risk. I also think police should generally be unarmed, because it'd force them to de-escalate and not give them the ability to easily end lives.
  That said, never? There are times where it's OK. Even the most civilian friendly police forces in the world still occasionally see the need to shoot someone. There are people who just need to be stopped before they cause more harm.
- No mention in your bio that you're unable to read the article before commenting?
  
  No mention in your bio that you’re unable to read the article before commenting?
  I did actually, which is why I came back and made my comment on this post.
  I'm purposely criticizing the person who made the summary of the post, as it tends to indicate trying to direct a conversation in a certain way, without expressing all the summary facts.

If random ARMED men ever Approach me I'll be sure to NOT fight back in case they are Cops who can LEGALLY kill me!

The post description is a bit biased. Reed fired on the officers first. Without that fact, this is terrible. With it, it's terrible but understandable (to an extent).
- You're not reading, there's no evidence he shot at all just that there was a gun recovered and a police department who for years ran an illegal blacksite interrogation prison claims he fired first.
  Who to believe.. who indeed.
  
  The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.
  Understanding there is no clear footage showing he fired first, and I'm not saying I believe one way or the other, but it will be interesting to see the full set of bodycam footage. OP left this out of the overview.

If I had to guess, they pulled Reed over because thought he had something illegal in the car. The just used the seat belt as an excuse to pull him over and attempt to establish probable cause for a search of the car.
That is probably supported by this:
The Civilian Office of Police Accountability said preliminary evidence showed Reed fired first, injuring an officer in the Humboldt Park neighborhood on the city’s West Side. Then four officers returned fire, shooting 96 rounds.
As well as the fact that, even after a cop had emptied his magazine, Reed still managed to start driving away.
I'm normally an ACAB guy, but the video makes it look like they were justified in continuing to fire, especially if it's true that Reed fired first.
- In that video they already had guns out and pointed at him. A group of unmarked "cops" shouldn't be allowed to draw weapons and surround your car on a seatbelt violation. The second they all showed up with weapons drawn I would consider his shot self defense.
  They shouldn't even be approaching the car until a uniformed officer is on scene to vouch that these aren't just some Proud Boys (or any similar group of wanna be paramilitary out LARPing) playing cops.
  
  They shouldn't even be approaching the car until a uniformed officer is on scene to vouch that these aren't just some Proud Boys (or any similar group of wanna be paramilitary out LARPing) playing cops.
  Cash money says they were some Proud Boys being cops.
- The police always claim they were shot at first. The number of times I've heard that and it turns out the police shot themselves and then murdered someone makes me very hesitant to believe that without clear video of it.
  
  there is literal video in the linked article of him shooting first.

100 shots from five cops is …. Actually fairly reserved.
20 rounds a piece, a Glock 19 9mm, with the 19 round mag… that could easily have been dumped inside of 15-20 seconds, faster if they didn’t care to aim.
Cops are trained, that when they start shooting they don’t stop shooting until either the target hits the pavement or makes it very obvious they’re no longer a threat. (Which, is why you see cops dump full mags into kids.) there is no “wing ‘em and they’ll give up.”
Once a cop decides to use lethal force… its over.
I have no idea of the particulars- and I’m making assumption that the cops murdered another kid. But that headline is not nearly as excessive as they want you to believe. (Though “cops shot kid” should get you angry!)
- Cops are trained, that when they start shooting they don’t stop shooting until either the target hits the pavement or makes it very obvious they’re no longer a threat. (Which, is why you see cops dump full mags into kids.) there is no “wing ‘em and they’ll give up.”
  You're saying that like it's the way they should be trained.
  The very fact that they are shooting children over and over again doesn't suggest to you that maybe this is the wrong sort of training?
  
  I ain't defending it.
  I completely agree with your assessment that they absolutely need better training- one of the things is spending increased focused on deescalation and soft skills- time-wise,
  one unfortunate reality is there are people who would fire out of that car at cops. looking into it it's at least plausible that the guy shot first. Not ... that I trust the narrative. Dirty cops get protection from the others. who knows who shot first.
  all I was trying to point out is that, a hundred rounds fired by five cops, isn't actually all that much.
  
  That does make some sense, once the decision to use lethal force has been made, you use it until it has worked. Police do carry nonlethal weapons as well.
- 100 shots from five cops is …. Actually fairly reserved.
  Not when they have no valid cause to fire even once FFs!
  20 rounds a piece, a Glock 19 9mm, with the 19 round mag… that could easily have been dumped inside of 15-20 seconds, faster if they didn’t care to aim.
  Sø you're saying that, at least some of them emptied their mag and then RELOADED to keep shooting for no good reason? That's what you call fucking RESERVED??
  Cops are trained, that when they start shooting they don’t stop shooting until either the target hits the pavement
  First of all, that's horrible. That's murder.
  Second of all, it's pretty damn hard to "hit the pavement" when you're seated inside a car trying in vain to not be murdered!
  or makes it very obvious they’re no longer a threat
  Barricading yourself inside his car unarmed wasn't obvious enough?
  not nearly as excessive as they want you to believe
  It's plenty fucking excessive and even WITH your disclaimers at the end, you're still minimizing absolutely insane behavior and dismissing it as "reserved". That's fucked up and you should probably reevaluate some things..
  
  First of all, you should probably watch the video in the article. Or any of the other videos that came out.
  Of special note is the cop at the front passenger window getting shot. those were the first shots fired. You, uh, sure, you want to insist he was "unarmed"? or perhaps you're suggesting the cop buddies just didn't like him?
  in the cbs segment on it... the ex-cop-talking head makes an excellent point: the pretext for stopping was total bullshit. For one, those windows are heavy tint. you can't see inside. For another, special tactics teams are not used for "routine traffic stops". unless it's an exceedingly slow day. (and it's chicago. no such thing as a slow day.)
  it doesn't pass the bullshit test. but in the videos released of the shooting... cops got shot first. I'm surprised they didn't turn the truck into scrap. And yes. that's fucked up.
- Once a cop decides to use lethal force… its over.
  And unfortunately they seem to be making that decision before they even arrive on the scene.
  
  They were certainly prepared to make it, and considering how short the trip was- like they got in the truck, rolled up and rolled out on the guy.
  There’s something else here. It wasn’t a seatbelt beef, and it wasn’t an accident.

Rule 1 with talking to police in a car is always keep both hands on the stearing wheel at all times or keep you hands whare the officer can see them if in passenger or back seat rule 2 is always comply with the officer even if you are in the right and he is wrong take your Battle to the court Room the odds are better and you don't end up like Swiss cheese cause you reached for some chewing gum and the cop mistakes it for a loaded fire arm
- Fuckin hell Eddie, did they shoot your punctuation too?
- Plainclothes Chicago police officers fired nearly 100 gunshots over 41 seconds during a traffic stop that left one man dead and one officer injured
  Five officers from a tactical unit who were in an unmarked police vehicle surrounded an SUV last month driven by Dexter Reed, allegedly for failing to wear a seatbelt.
  
  https://abc7chicago.com/dexter-reed-chicago-police-shooting-body-camera-video-copa/14637195/
  From the video: The 26 year old was already facing illegal gun charges and if the cops found the gun he'd be going back to jail.
  Plainclothes Chicago police officers
  At least one clearly had a vest on marked POLICE
  It's very likely they ran the plates, knew he was up on weapons charges, saw him not wearing a seatbelt and used that as a pretence to pull him over. End of the day he was a criminal doing criminal things who shot a cop first.
  
  Doesn't matter the reason they used he broke rule 1 keep your hands on wheel and rule 2 comply when asked he could of brought that up in court
- Super cool to need specific rules to not die when interacting with local law enforcement. Totally normal.

He shot at the cops. They fired back. What's to understand?
- According to additional information, they were in an unmarked car and not uniformed officers. So for all intents and purposes, a random group of people.
  How do you expect someone to react to a seemingly random group of people approaching a vehicle and demanding they get out? Sounds like self defense in that context.
  We need all the information, with body cam video. Police have lied about these situations before to protect their shitty decisions. Their report cannot be trusted by itself.
  
  In Humboldt Park which has had car jackings more than triple for the last few years.
  
  You mean like the bodycam video that it's in the article? The one that clearly shows at least one of them wearing a vest that has 'POLICE' written on it while they repeatedly tell him to unlock and open the door? and after being told multiple times to unlock and open the door, saying he will, so the cops on the drivers side all back off to let him out and then he starts blasting at the one on the passenger side?
  There was absolutely no confusion at the point when he started shooting that they were cops.
  
  Unmarked cars generally have lights though.
  
  Random people? Unmarked cars put on lights to pull people over
- Plain clothes officers in an unmarked car with guns drawn on him for a seatbelt violation. How is somebody supposed to differentiate them from any other gang calling themselves "police"?
  He shot in self defense. Period.
  
  https://abc7chicago.com/dexter-reed-chicago-police-shooting-body-camera-video-copa/14637195/
  More information here, from the video narration:
  The 26 year old was already facing illegal gun charges and if the cops found the gun he'd be going back to jail. He didn't shoot in self defence. He shot because he was a criminal afraid to go back to jail.
- He shot at plain clothes police officers with an unmarked car that didn't announce themselves as police in the video I saw, but they turned their video on after the encounter started.
- "Mmm... cop's boot" (You on the Internet)
  
  We're talking about trying to murder another human. Stop dehumanising them.
- Wow it's genuinely disturbing that so many people here think attempting murder is an appropriate response to getting pulled over. Yeesh people.
  
  Wow it's genuinely disturbing that so many people here think a SWAT team of an appropriate response to someone not wearing a seatbelt. Yeesh people.
  
  You really shouldn't be surprised, this place is worse than Reddit in that regard.